Originally Posted by Cyberjet
Hardly. We can both agree that getting thrown in jail for something said or as a result of a behavior regardless whether it is bad or good is a repercussion - are you following me Einstein?
Agreed, getting thrown into jail for something said is a repercussion. So is being shot or having your tongue cut out or having your mouth sewn onto your own anus and any number of other scenarios that have no basis in the reality of this situation.
Is it any different that when one speaks his mind that the threat of a suspension or losing one's job is to muffle one's ability to speak freely.
So you are saying there is no difference between the government throwing someone in jail or a private entity deciding to end their professional relationship with someone?
Just want to make sure I follow the huge leap you're making. Because what you're talking about is nanny state bull****. That private entities - corporations, people, etc - should not have the right to respond to what you say. That 'freedom of speech' only extends to the first person to say something.
Talk about PC.
Just curious - so if I start my call off with a client tomorrow by saying something outrageous like, 'Good morning, I'm calling on behalf of Cogswell Cogs, Hitler did nothing wrong.' the company has no right to respond to that and fire me?
Or are you saying that you are arbitrarily drawing a line in the sand that certain things should be able to be spoken with no repercussions whatsoever and you will be the arbiter of what does and does not fall within 'SUPER SPECIAL PROTECTED SPEECH' and what is regular old offensive speech?